🚨 Sorry but Hersh’s latest article is supposition from a western viewpoint at best & just because someone who’s renowned or admired writes something doesn’t mean it’s true. Especially when advocating in favor of intelligence agencies & constantly only from their perspective. The article states “It is thought that Putin would want to make a deal,” alleging Russian losses were disproportionate.

Here’s why I think this is an unlikely scenario: ✍️

1) This is supposition about what the Russian leader might do. And that’s all it is. Intelligence agents, State Dept spooks, constantly & willingly telling only one journalist said information this often, has an agenda. And that’s been clear for months from these anonymous* revelations.

2) Where are they getting this? Ukraine’s losses have been disproportionate. Yes there’s loss of life on both sides. But why would Russia have to prove anything to the west by holding new elections in the way they would want? Why would the need to appease the west? They don’t need them, quite the other way around. Also the source mentions a stalemate. This isn’t a stalemate. Ukraine has essentially lost and refused to admit defeat.

3) If Russia would be this naive to trust anything the west says as we’ve been here before, it would discredit everything they’ve done. Plus it would destroy any purpose that it had in the SMO. Putin would lose so much public support. It makes 0 sense.

4) The Minsk agreements all show the west has 0 intention of respecting anything. To accept Ukraine into NATO would literally violate its own red line. Most of NATO doesn’t even want Ukraine to join it & it’s less of likelihood now that Zelenskyy and other have admitted to the failure of the counteroffensive.

5) Russia is extremely diplomatic yes but things have changed in terms of the point of no return. Peace is possible of course as has been said by both the RFM and the Kremlin, but only if Russia’s demands are meant to ensure this won’t happen again. Yet this entire scenario lays out the foundations for this to continue and for some sort of control by the west to be established.

6) Russia wants the war to end, as do many others and Ukraine is already in bed with NATO, so it’s not even that it’s acceptance would change much outwardly. But in terms of inward actions, in terms of what joining NATO means in the language of war, even beyond article 5, this along with other concessions made by Russia doesn’t seem like a realistic solution they’d want. They understand Ukraine as a proxy will always continue to be used by the west for the final objective: The balkanization of Russia.

“This [conflict] proves once again that the US will never leave West Asia. The region is absolutely essential for the empire, considering that the Americans are being slowly, but surely and very forcefully expelled from the big Eurasia by the Russia-China strategic partnership – by their trade deals, their multilateral organizations and economic integration projects. All that goes completely against American domination of Eurasia," Pepe Escobar, veteran geopolitical analyst, told the New Rules podcast.

👉 Why Israel-US war in Gaza is a war on multipolarity, Zelensky's growing desperation, and the battle for BRICS: You can find the full episode on Rumble

✅Definitely a must-watch!

It’s time to revisit a topic which many found objectionable back when I addressed it in August 2022: How did the West get it so wrong on Russia?

The answer I offered then remains valid today: incompetence shaped by Russophobia.

Just a reminder that Anne Applebaum has blood on her hands…

Seven psychological manipulations Biden used to pressure Congress to pass a new Ukraine aid package

Have you ever heard the manipulative "if we don’t protect Ukraine, we can be next" argument when Western leaders try to justify their poor policy? All such manipulations have been outdone by Joe Biden’s latest urgent message to Congress: the address literally consisted of propaganda techniques.

Nika, our AI anchor, is sure that all of these psychological tricks have long been known. Get ready to find out what are they, and how to counter these tactics.

Subscribe to @geopolitics_live

Of interest.

Opinion by Lt.Col. Oleg Shalandin:

I was asked to comment on the Foreign Policy article “The Shortest Path to Victory in Ukraine Is Through Crimea.” You can read the article here
The general tone of the article suggests that the collective West is not abandoning attempts to continue the conflict, which is mistakenly considered to be a conflict between Russia and Ukraine. No, this is a conflict on a global scale, localized in a very specific territory. And they [the collective West] do not intend to give up the armed struggle, although they are looking for a way out of the impasse of the discrepancy between their desires and their own capabilities.

With the tenacity of a maniac, they talk about the blockade of Crimea. Why do they need Crimea?
The Crimean peninsula is of strategic importance for our defense. Whoever owns Crimea controls the Black Sea. NATO was going to establish a military base in Crimea in 2012-2013 for the same purpose, and the testing of legitimate grounds, even if it would mean they have to include Ukraine in the alliance, began even earlier.

How will this ensure the security of the Ukraine? In no way. Ukraine abandoned its own security, becoming a representative of NATO interests in the post-Soviet space. With of without Crimea - this does not change absolutely a thing in the geopolitical approaches of the West, including their views on the use of Ukraine as an outsource of war.

But I am pleased by the fact that in the West there are voices saying that negotiations are necessary. True, these voices are speaking aloud not from the good will of a desire to end the conflict, but for in need of a break. The West’s confusion between what is desired and reality is very indicative. This means that we are doing everything correctly, that the SMO was calculated correctly, and the approaches to its implementation were correct.

According to my feelings from communicating with foreigners, they have a very favorable attitude towards Russia. True, no one is going to listen to them. But it would be necessary. One of the comments: a prerequisite for joining NATO is to be an idiot.

I believe in the victory of Russian weapons!
The whole world is Russia, and only Kosovo is Serbia!

#source

@Slavyangrad